Thursday, September 28, 2023

UFO 'Encounters' - A New Netflix Series

Encounters series Logo

"Billed in Netflix press materials as a 'detective story,' Encounters relies on both firsthand accounts and also the testimony of various scientists and military officials to delve into reports of suspected extraterrestrial phenomena."

     The upcoming docuseries is the latest in recent years to explore UFOs in the wake of a 2017 article in the New York Times that first exposed a shadowy Pentagon program to study
what the government officially refers to as UAP, short for unidentified anomalous phenomena.

Directed by Yon Motskin, each episode of the series produced by Stephen Spielberg's Amblin Television, Boardwalk Pictures and Vice Studios explores a separate report of a mass sighting in a different part of the world.

Sunday, September 24, 2023

NASA Shares Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena Independent Study Report

NASA Shares Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena Independent Study Report

At NASA, we use data and the tools of science to explore the unknown in the atmosphere and space. In June 2022, NASA established an external independent study team to find a way we can use our open-source data and resources to help shed light on the nature of future UAP.

     In response to a recommendation by an independent study team for NASA to play a more prominent role in understanding Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP), the agency announced Thursday it is appointing a director of UAP research.

The study team’s full report, which includes a foreword from NASA noting the new role, is available on the agency’s website:

NASA commissioned the independent study to better understand how the agency can contribute to ongoing government efforts to further the study observations of events in the sky that cannot be identified as balloons, aircraft, or as known natural phenomena from a scientific perspective.

“At NASA, it's in our DNA to explore – and to ask why things are the way they are. I want to thank the Independent Study Team for providing insight on how NASA can better study and analyze UAP in the future,” said NASA Administrator Bill Nelson. “NASA’s new Director of UAP Research will develop and oversee the implementation of NASA’s scientific vision for UAP research, including using NASA’s expertise to work with other agencies to analyze UAP and applying artificial intelligence and machine learning to search the skies for anomalies. NASA will do this work transparently for the benefit of humanity.”

The report contains the external study team’s findings and recommendations which aim to inform NASA on what possible data is available to be collected and how the agency can help shed light on the origin and nature of future UAP. The report is not a review or assessment of previous UAP incidents.

While NASA is still evaluating the report and assessing the independent study team’s findings and recommendations, the agency is committed to contributing to the federal government’s unified UAP effort by appointing a director of UAP research.

A NASA liaison to the Department of Defense previously covered limited UAP activities for the agency, and the director role will centralize communications, resources, and data analytical capabilities to establish a robust database for the evaluation of future UAP. The director also will leverage NASA’s expertise in artificial intelligence, machine learning, and space-based observation tools to support and enhance the broader government initiative on UAP.

The independent study team’s overall recommendation for NASA from its report is that the agency can play a prominent role in the government’s effort to understand UAP by furthering the study and data collection of UAP. The external study recommends that NASA use its open-source resources, extensive technological expertise, data analysis techniques, federal and commercial partnerships, and Earth-observing assets to curate a better and robust dataset for understanding future UAP.

NASA also will advance citizen reporting by engaging with the public and commercial pilots to build a broader, more reliable UAP dataset to use to identify future UAP incidents as well as destigmatize the study of UAP.

“Data is the critical lifeblood needed to advance scientific exploration, and we thank the independent study team members for lending NASA their expertise towards identifying what available data is possible to understand the nature and origin of future UAP,” said Nicola Fox, associate administrator, Science Mission Directorate at NASA Headquarters in Washington. “The director of UAP Research is a pivotal addition to NASA’s team and will provide leadership, guidance and operational coordination for the agency and the federal government to use as a pipeline to help identify the seemingly unidentifiable.”

The independent study team, set up outside of NASA, used unclassified data from civilian government entities, commercial data, and data from other sources to inform their findings and recommendations in the report. There are currently a limited number of high-quality observations of UAP, which currently make it impossible to draw firm scientific conclusions about their nature.

“Using unclassified data was essential for our team’s fact-finding, open-communication collaboration, and for upholding scientific rigor to produce this report for NASA,” said David Spergel, president of the Simons Foundation and chair of the UAP independent study team. “The team wrote the report in conjunction with NASA’s pillars of transparency, openness and scientific integrity to help the agency shed light on the nature of future UAP incidents. We found that NASA can help the whole-of-government UAP effort through systematic data calibration, multiple measurements and ensuring thorough sensor metadata to create a data set that is both reliable and extensive for future UAP study.”

The UAP independent study team is a counsel of 16 community experts across diverse areas on matters relevant to potential methods of study for unidentified anomalous phenomena. NASA commissioned the study to examine UAP from a scientific perspective and create a roadmap for how to use data and the tools of science to move our understanding of UAP forward.

Friday, September 15, 2023

EFR Announces Online UFO Archive

Expanding Frontiers Research
     Expanding Frontiers Research (EFR) is set to launch an online archive about UFO reports and investigators. The Salt Lake City nonprofit organization will publish the archive
Thursday, Sep. 14, at its website, Expanding Frontiers Research dot org. Records spanning decades will be freely accessible to researchers and anyone interested in browsing and downloading the material. Historic documents and audio recordings reflecting events surrounding UFO investigations, correspondence between high-profile researchers, the intelligence community and much more will be featured.

EFR Executive Director Erica Lukes says the timing of publishing the archive couldn't be better, given all the recent interest in UFOs and what some are calling UAP. “With the UFO hearings in Washington and all the public interest,” Lukes said, “the archive launch comes at an exciting and critical time to look at this subject, understand its history, and see the potential for disinformation and spy games, all while considering the possibility of life out there.”

Lukes began collecting UFO memorabilia several years ago. People started donating their personal collections to her growing file cabinets of material. Donors included investigators who spent lifetimes compiling case files and correspondence. Lukes now maintains a substantial physical collection making up one of the most important UFO archives in the United States. She subsequently co-founded Expanding Frontiers Research in 2022 and got to work scanning records and preparing them for posting.

The online archive will include selections from the special collections of the late UFO research pioneers Ann Druffel and Gordon Lore, as well as records donated by longtime archivist Barry Greenwood. Work and correspondence with scientists J. Allen Hynek and James McDonald, as well as famous alleged alien abductee Betty Hill, will be featured. “While UFOs can be a fun and fascinating topic to explore, it's important for people to get a complete view of the individuals who made up the UFO subculture over the decades,” Lukes explained. “When we can browse the notes made by investigators and their contacts for ourselves, it better informs our perspectives than when we are limited to cherry-picked data that promotes a single point of view. At EFR we strive to publish reliable information that helps peel back some layers and show what's really been happening. That includes the good, the bad, and the ugly.”

The Emma Woods Special Collection will be among the sections maintained in the online archive. “Emma Woods,” a pseudonym, became a controversial figure in the UFO genre after she voiced objections to the actions and methodologies of UFO investigator and author David Jacobs. Her complaints arose out of her 2002-2007 interactions with Jacobs which included his highly questionable uses of hypnosis. Woods has been contributing records to the EFR archive for publication.

The archive will also highlight records obtained from intelligence agencies through the Freedom of Information Act. This includes FBI documents pertaining to intelligence officers who were active in the UFO community throughout their careers. EFR conducts FOIA requests as an ongoing part of its standard operations.

“More clearly understanding the past helps us more accurately understand the present,” Lukes explained, “and there are no better ways of learning the past than through official documents and going right to the original sources.”

Browse the Expanding Frontiers Research archive when it goes live Sep. 14 and learn more about the organization's activities at

Wednesday, September 13, 2023

Gone Fishing – Calvin Parker Has Passed Away

Gone Fishing – Calvin Parker Has Passed Away -
     It is with great sadness that I have to inform you that Calvin Parker passed away on August 24th at 8.15 am. He died peacefully at home surrounded by his wife Waynette and other loved ones. Calvin was diagnosed with terminal kidney cancer some time back so we knew his time was limited but it was still bad news when it arrived. A private memorial service was held at the Guardian Angels Funeral Home on September 2nd. At the request of Calvin’s family, I have not released anything in public until now.

Calvin and I had become close friends over these last five years and we talked regularly on skype. He was a charming, intelligent man with a great sense of humour. I’m not ashamed to admit that I cried when I was informed by his wife Waynette that he had died.

Thankfully I spoke with him the week before and told him that I loved and respected him. He already knew that anyway. I also told him that he had more friends around the world that he could ever imagine. His personality, his story and his two books touched a great many people and also helped him get rid of some of the trauma that he had carried since that night in 1973.

When I began working with Calvin I agreed that I would help him cement his legacy. That legacy was to tell his story in full and help to document it for posterity so that future generations will have this information to study and maybe help understand what happened to him and Charles Hickson that night. Calvin was simply looking for answers, some of which he found, others that he didn’t.

I could continue to tell you more about Calvin Parker but I would instead suggest you listen to one of the many podcasts he did. Charles Hickson can also be located online telling his side of the story. Of course, it was their love of fishing that took them to the Pascagoula River that night in October 1973.

Maybe old anglers don’t die, they just go fishing in a bigger river.

Sunday, September 10, 2023

Alien Abductee, Calvin Parker Has Died

Alien Abductee, Calvin Parker Has Died

"The two men were fishing near Ingalls Shipyard when they said they suddenly heard a piercing sound, and spotted a large UFO hovering behind them. There were three beings on board that carried the men on to the spaceship to examine them. After about 30 minutes, they were returned to the riverbank, and the UFO took off."

      Calvin Parker, the Pascagoula man known around the world for his tale of alien abduction, has died. According to a friend of the family, Parker passed away August 24, 2023 after a long
battle with kidney cancer. He was at home, surrounded by loved ones, including his wife, Waynette.

Wednesday, September 06, 2023

The TOP SECRET Air Force UFO Detection Plan

The TOP SECRET Air Force UFO Detaction Plan

"Mid-March 1952:AF Intelligence (AFOIN) Assistant for (Intelligence) Production Brig. Gen. William M. Garland initiated a TOP SECRET compartmented project (to be designed and built by AF R&D) to establish a global instrumented UFO detection and tracking system that would obviate the need for non-technical anecdotal UFO sighting reports, eventually resulting in approval of an official AF policy to deemphasize or reject anecdotal UFO reports (July 28, 1952)."

     Decades before MADAR was even thought of, the United States Air Force had a Top Secret plan to detect UFOs and obtain electronic as well as photographic information. We first discovered this Top Secret project while updating the 1952 chrono in 2005 and thought the idea was for the Air Force to simply eliminate anecdotal accounts from witnesses and eventually get rid of Project Blue Book. But I personally consider another real possibility that, with Roswell being a real event and UFOs now being accepted as real, it made sense that the Air Force wanted to keep better tabs on UFO activity, especially after the sobering massive UFO wave of 1952.

At least as early as January 3rd, 1952 somebody in the Air Force clearly demonstrated the knowledge of the problem and reality of UFOs. It is my opinion that the Pentagon knew of the reality as early as Roswell in the summer of 1947 and that's when the cover-up began. But that's another story. What you are about to read here is supported by documentation, some of which will be provided later in 2022.

Project Grudge (2/11/49), which had replaced the original Project SIGN (1/22/48), had publicly denounced the reality of the phenomena for those first years. But that all changed when Project Blue Book replaced Grudge in September of 1951. But there was more to it than just Blue Book. It was higher than that.

January 3,1952, SECRET Memo
Garland Memo To Samford (Air Force UFO Detaction Plan) (1 of 3) 1-2-1952
Garland Memo To Samford (Air Force UFO Detaction Plan) (2 of 3) 1-2-1952
Garland Memo To Samford (Air Force UFO Detaction Plan) (3 of 3) 1-2-1952

Brig. Gen. William M. Garland, Assistant for the Production of Intelligence, wrote a memorandum (above) for General Samford, Director of Air Force Intelligence, with the title (SECRET). The subject, "Contemplated Action to Determine the Nature and Origin of the Phenomena Connected with the Reports of Unusual Flying Objects." (Courtesy, Joel Carpenter)

Jan 29, 1952–Captain Edward Ruppelt, Project Blue Book's director, on a trip to the Pentagon to brief Gen. Garland, visited the offices of AF Intelligence (AFOIN) having collections of UFO files, and discovered that they had more complete files than did ATIC in Dayton, and he arranged to have copies made of the various missing files made for him at Project Grudge at ATIC (though multiple visits were required to obtain the copies and Ruppelt probably did not succeed in getting everything). These AFOIN offices with UFO files included the Technical Capabilities Branch (TCB) of the Evaluation Division (AFOIN-TCB or AFOIV-TC) and the Collection Control Branch of the Collection Division (AFOIN-CC or AFOIC-CC). (Brad Sparks)

Bolender Memo (1 of 3) 10-20-1969
Bolender Memo (2 of 3) 10-20-1969
Bolender Memo (3 of 3) 10-20-1969

The best reports going somewhere else was suspected (and understandable) but this information precedes what we found in 1979 with the Bolender document in 1979. It amounted to confirmation of a long-standing suspicion: Project Blue Book served as a front for a classified project that handled the truly sensitive reports. The memo was prepared on October 20, 1969 by Brig. Gen. C. H. Bolender, the Air Force's Deputy Director of Development. It was clear: UFO sightings that involved national security were not part of the Blue Book system!

Now with that serious backdrop, here is where we get into a Top Secret project that will surprise a lot of people

There was a briefing mentioned in Project Grudge Status Report No. 3. It mentioned that Brig. Gen. William M. Garland, Assistant for (Intelligence) Production, and his staff at the Directorate of Intelligence, HQ USAF, were briefed on the status of the Project Grudge UFO Study. At this meeting Gen. Garland introduced a revolutionary new intelligence policy and methodology which emphasized the use of instrumentation for intelligence collection, including to detect and track UFO's (which would eventually be the basis for terminating Project BLUE BOOK as an intelligence function, converting it to a PR psych war propaganda function beginning in July 1952 over a 6-month transition period - Brad Sparks).

As an interim last-chance measure to prove whether anecdotal sightings had any value, Gen. Garland approved of Ruppelt’s publicity plan to draw in UFO reports from the public so that triangulations might be obtained, and this led to Garland secretly backing the LIFE magazine article.

On the same date, Jan. 29, Gen. Garland gave the welcoming address to the SECRET compartmented MIT Project BEACON HILL in Cambridge, Mass., where he gave the marching orders to the assembled scientists to study ways AF intelligence methodology can be revolutionized through use of technology.

Mid-March 1952– AF Intelligence (AFOIN) Assistant for (Intelligence) Production Brig. Gen. William M. Garland initiated a TOP SECRET compartmented project (to be designed and built by AF R&D) to establish a global instrumented UFO detection and tracking system that would obviate the need for non-technical anecdotal UFO sighting reports, eventually resulting in approval of an official AF policy to deemphasize or reject anecdotal UFO reports (July 28, 1952). (Brad Sparks)

March 19, 1952–Ruppelt briefed General Benjamin W. Chidlaw, then the Commanding General of the Air Defense Command, and his staff, telling them about Blue Book's plan. They agreed with it in principle and suggested that he work out the details with the Director of Intelligence for the ADC, Brigadier W. M. Burgess. General Burgess designated Major Verne Sadowski of his staff to be the ADC liaison officer with New Grudge.

March 26, 1952–Gen. Garland sent ATIC Technical Analysis Division Chief, Col. Sanford H. Kirkland, and Project Blue Book Chief, Lt. Edward J. Ruppelt, to brief MIT's Project BEACON HILL on UFO's. (Brad Sparks)

April 4, 1952–Gen. Garland arranged for the AF-Rand Corp. Satellite Project to receive a UFO briefing from Ruppelt on a visit to ATIC. Ruppelt met and befriended Rand satellite engineer, Jim Thompson. (Brad Sparks)

June 5, 1952–AF Intelligence initiated a series of internal Staff Studies on UFO's, inspired by Gen. Garland's new policy emphasizing instrumentation, which was circulated within AFOIN and its field element ATIC. Staff Studies led to policy and project plan approved by Director of Intelligence, Gen. Samford, on July 28. (Brad Sparks)

July 10-17, 1952–Dr. Kaplan Visits ATIC Project Blue BookUCLA Geophysics Prof. Joseph Kaplan, a member of the AF Scientific Advisory Board previously involved with a highly secret compartmented UFO tracking project in 1949 leading to Project TWINKLE, visits ATIC and Project BLUE BOOK, advising on plans for a top scientific panel to establish the importance and credibility of the UFO problem within the scientific community (a later distorted version of the plan is forced on the CIA by the AF as the Robertson Panel and intentionally designed by the AF to fail spectacularly). The Battelle Memorial Institute scientists are deemed not prominent enough to secure support within the scientific community, but will continue with statistical studies of BLUE BOOK's case files (ordered by Gen. Samford in Dec 1951 to specifically verify Ruppelt's sighting pattern analysis, showing UFO concentrations around atomic weapons bases, after his briefing disturbed Samford). Battelle also continues special lab analyses of alleged UFO physical evidence from time to time. (Brad Sparks)

Oct. 23, 1952–RadTelex. A Blue Book UFO briefing for the entire Los Alamos Scientific Lab. Afterwards Dr. Crew pulled together a group of Los Alamos personnel to meet privately with Ruppelt and Col. Bower to discuss radiation UFO evidence and info they had from (Mt.) Palomar, Los Alamos, and Oak Ridge on possible and actual UFO radiation incidents there. (See also Dec. 2 memo)

Nov. 4, 1952–Capt. E. J. Ruppelt and Lt. R. M. Olsson visited Col. Hood, Chief of Nuclear Powered Aircraft Branch of WADC. Col. Hood had contacted ATIC in regard to certain sightings of UFO's at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in which he and a Naval officer had attempted to obtain correlation between sightings and peaks in radiation backgrounds. There are indications that there may be some correlation present between unknown radar pickups and rises in radiation

Dec. 15, 1952–Memo for the record. Capt. Ruppelt's call to Homer T. Gittings, Jr. concerning visual sightings of UFOs and radiation of unknown sources, reference to Mt. Palomar. A Mr. W. W. Carter of Los Alamos, New Mexico, was the person who knew people at Mt. Palomar who had seen unidentified aerial objects at the same time they had detected some radiation.

December 23, 1952–Letter from Office of Naval Research, Pasadena Branch to Chief of Naval Research. Details on old report of unusual phenomena concerning erratic (geiger counter) equipment behavior at Palomar.

Dec. 29, 1952–Preparation for trip to Los Alamos, N.M., and the West Coast. Capt. Ruppelt had called Lt. Col. Paul H. Butman, Division of Military Applications, Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D.C. Col. Butman had previously been briefed on the possible correlation between detection of radiation from unknown sources and unidentified flying objects by Capt. Ruppelt during a visit to AEC. Col. Butman was requested to contact Los Alamos laboratories and request that Mr. Carter, Mr. Gittings, and Mr. Simmons come to Albuquerque for an interrogation.

Jan 9, 1953–SECRET letter to Miles Goll from H. C. Cross (PENTICLE MEMO) describing a largescale military plan recommended to ATIC to entrap UFOs to secure evidence at high incident areas. This just a week before the CIA-sponsored meetings of Jan 14-16.

My search for data in the NICAP chronos took me to 1970 without any mentions of the plan after January 9th, 1953. So I asked Brad if we had missed something that wasn't placed on the chronos and if the project had gone more covert.

He told me the Air Force project became more sensitive and higher in classification. He suspects there are broken links in the 1969-70 chronos, like on the Bolender Memo and BB closure that may have more data. He also thought he might have some entries in 1959-63 chronos on documents referring to UFO incidents "bypassing the BB system" long before the phrase was used (reused) in the Bolender Memo in Oct 1969. Col Friend confirmed to him in March 2000 that this meant UFOs tracked by classified sensor systems BB was not privy to. The CIA "Father of Satellite Reconnaissance" former CIA Deputy Director for Plans, Richard Bissell told him that plans for infrared satellite tracking of UFOs were in development in the 50s early 60s when he was in satellite work at the CIA.

In Aug 1956 long before he came to NICAP, Dick Hall heard over the radio a leaked AF report that two satellites (actually two types) would be used to track UFOs. This was probably the greatest leak of classified UFO info in all history but its significance was missed by Hall and others who kept trying to force this report into the irrelevant and pitiful grapefruit-sized public Vanguard satellite plans, unaware that the relevant classified AF plans were for massive multi-ton 20-foot satellites. In 1955-56, Lockheed and RAND realized that the one type of satellite, the TV camera version (going back to Gen Garland March 1952), was impossible because it required massive data rates and could not image moving aircraft or UFOs -- even today this is impossible. The second type, the infrared sensor satellite, was viable because it looked for hotspot heat sources and only transmitted that highly relevant data, ignoring the irrelevant cool earth background which was massively repetitive and useless. The infrared sats became operational in 1970 enabling the AF to finally close BB. There was also continental-sized radar beam coverage by OTH (Over The Horizon) radars transferred to NORAD in 1968 (not the limited 200-300-mile range of typical NORAD radars, but OTH of lower resolution and with other issues. (Sparks).

So, nothing in the NICAP data after January of 1953? Well, that's what we had thought until I found some additional, and very important information which I had mentioned in my most recent book, "Cap Point". We have to thank, Australian researcher, Paul Dean, and American researchers, Barry Greenwood and Brad Sparks for the following blockbuster information. I had mentioned in my book that it was unfortunate that we did not have a more comprehensive list of UFO sightings from Vietnam along with case directories and case summaries as we did for sightings in Korea, but the many sightings in Vietnam strongly suggested there was a potential for an escalation that might have lead to a nuclear confrontation with the super powers. UFO reports were consistently being collected and investigated, in various forms, with the primary purpose being to determine whether or not these events were related to enemy activity. Often they were not. So far, from just a few reports Paul Dean found, Brad Sparks compiled some stats on about 500 UFO Sensor Trackings by Radar-Visual, Laser Range-Finder, Video Camera, Night Scope, and Infrared in 1968-69.

Sparks: "Except for 2 probable helicopters shot down, on June 16 & 17, 1968, this network was completely unable to identify any of the other 500 tracks or so.The stats are an incredible 99.6% Unknowns, IFO's 0.4%. To help the IFO cause so to speak, a conservative guestimate of maybe 5 IFO's in the uncertain early phase in mid-June 1968 would make this 99% Unknowns, 1% IFO's, a devastating statistic. These are from INSTRUMENT SENSORS. No more hopeless reliance on mere human anecdotal evidence. The 7th AF history clearly states it was about "UFO's" NOT about helicopters, it only began initially with "unidentified helicopters" as of around June 15-16, 1968. But it took a deadly turn with the friendly fire of anti-aircraft missiles hitting a ship (Aussie HMAS Hobart) instead of aircraft (helicopters). Then they realized it was UFO's...Now we have two brand new codenames for UFO sensor tracking networks: HAVE FEAR and LETHAL CHASE."

At this point it is important to bring up a few incidents that occurred BEFORE 1952. Most researchers are aware of some of them, but NOT aware that they involved a planned, deliberate, top secret program.

Late Aug. 1947?; Alamogordo [Holloman] Army Air Field, New Mexico–Document evidence shows that the secret program to track and image UFOs began at least in August of 1947, a month after Roswell, Someone knew where to look for an object 200 miles up! We don't know the time but, AMC Watson Labs Project MOGUL tracked a stationary target at 200 miles altitude using a modified CPS-4 height-finder radar aimed at 70° elevation. Normally CPS-4 requires a crew of 6 operators so there may have been other witnesses. (Incidentally, the report was deliberately leaked out by the Air Force). Project SIGN sent two high-level investigators, but the prime witnesses were conveniently not available. The CPS-4 radar had been specially "modified" for the specific purpose of extending its 90-mile range to some 250 miles and to point it almost straight up into outer space to look for targets -- and then it did exactly that. It was a long time before we were able to put satellites up that high, and they had to orbit at 18,000 mph. This object HOVERED at that altitude!. We always assumed UFOs were being seen by civilians and ALSO members of the military. Now we know that the Navy and the Air Force were actively making an effort to see them and record data from the outset.

Ruppelt Cover-up No. 1 – Army UFO Tracking Network 1949 By Brad Sparks

1949 Army UFO Tracking Network–Brad Sparks provides (see right)led description of the 1949 Army UFO Observation Plan. Briefly, since Captain Ruppelt claimed that “many people” knew and talked about the Army plan with him it is evident that many people would also have known it was actually tracking UFOs, generating reports and leaving a paper trail through Army and Air Force intelligence, security and R&D channels. Brad Sparks: " So 'many' people undoubtedly heard a lot through the grapevine inasmuch as a wide variety of agencies, including the FBI, AEC/AESS, AFSWP, AFOSI, and even the Navy, were involved in regular classified briefings on the UFO events in Texas and New Mexico." Ruppelt publicly had claimed the plan was killed. But he could not honestly claim not knowing about the Army network’s UFO sighting reports in his own Project Grudge files, which of course prove that the Army network was very much alive. As Ruppelt said on page 56 of his own book, "The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects", “The [Army] reports were getting to ATIC.” Sparks: "On June 23, 1949, Air Force Director of Intelligence Gen Charles P. Cabell’s exec wrote 'By Command of the Chief of Staff' to AMC/Project Grudge that the Fourth Army’s Proceedings of the UFO History Workshop 44 May 19 request for AMC to send a technical observing team to Killeen Base was approved 'as a field exercise.' The Air Force not only knew that the Fourth Army was establishing a secret UFO triangulation observation network, but that it was already in operation, and so the Air Force authorized AMC/Grudge to notify Air Force Bases in the vicinity to spread the word!

April 27, 1950; White Sands, New Mexico film–In his book, Ruppelt claimed that there was no triangulation conducted in the “impressive” White Sands Proving Ground cine-theodolite case. According to him, only one theodolite tracked the UFO (pp. 52, 88-9, 212-3). See Brad Sparks detailed explanation on pages on page 44-45 in the link above. Ruppelt: “About all the film proved was that something was in the air and whatever it was, it was moving” (p. 88). As Brad makes clear, two Askania theodolite stations, M-7 and P-10, did track the UFO on April 27 and the base mathematician, Wilbur L. Mitchell and Capt. Perry Bryant, chief of the Data Reduction Unit. effected triangulation. Sparks: "This proves that Ruppelt knew about their analyses of the two filming incidents. In fact, Ruppelt had in his Grudge files the original data reduction report of May 15, 1950, which revealed that in the April 27 incident the four close-together UFOs had been tracked by two missile-tracking stations, P-10 and M-7, one taking missile-tracking photo-theodolite movie film of all four UFOs together, and so they did get an accurate triangulation, which revealed: “The objects were at an altitude of approximately 150,000 feet... over the Holloman range between the base and Tularosa Peak... The objects were approximately 30 feet in diameter... traveling at an undeterminable [sic], yet high speed.” Despite the fact that Ruppelt had read all the reports and even spoke about the analysts involved, he then falsely claimed, “If two or more cameras photograph the same object, it is possible to obtain a very accurate measurement of the photographed object’s altitude, speed, and size. Project Twinkle was a bust. Absolutely nothing was photographed." (p. 52). It has been proven beyond a doubt by documentation that film, including triangulation, was obtained on April 27, 1950. And again on May 24 and Aug. 31.

The evidence is clear. While the Air Force publicly played down UFOs, up until the time Project Blue Book was shut down in January of 1970, serious top secret work was being conducted. In the very beginning Project SIGN scientists were purged out because they were "believers". Project Grudge hired personnel who were trained and operated under the consensus that "whatever you see or hear, don't believe it". But as you saw earlier, somebody just didn't want the public to know about it but yet needed the public to report what the systems were picking up.

The most recent find concerning UFO detection occurred during Operation Foal Eagle in South Korea in 2003. This may have been a discovery that was later used in a detection mode, but it sure made it clear how UFOs were coming and going. I later published a list of vertical ascents and descents from Blue Book files. All this seems to confirm how our MADAR system works in the first place. Objects come in or leave in a burst of energy. But they can operate IN our atmosphere under idling conditions.

The civilian attempts to track UFOs began with Project Starlight International in Texas (1964). The detection system I developed at Vincennes, Indiana (1970) later became known as MADAR at Mt. Vernon, Indiana in 1973 and was moderately successful. These singular attempts were ramped up to the world-wide MADAR-III system which my team made operational in 2018 which now operates at 120 sites around the globe, including a dozen foreign countries. The idea from day one was similar to the Air Force Plan in 1952 in which we make every attempt possible to solicit sightings from the public in our attempt to correlate potential sightings of interest with processed MADAR anomalies. In the last three years we have been very successful.

The MADAR Project incorporates a magnetometer, an electronic compass, and an accelerometer, but we encourage ops to invest in a geiger counter based on what happened at Mt. Palomar in the 1950's and what occurred with MADAR and the "WOW!" Signal on August 15, 1977.

Thursday, August 31, 2023

The Alleged 1933 Italian UFO Crash Under Scrutiny – Fascist UFO Files

The Alleged 1933 Italian UFO Crash Under Scrutiny – Fascist UFO Files -

The “Fascist UFO Files” Under Scrutiny

Is It Appropriate To Consider And Term Them “Official Documents”?
A Technical Analysis by An Archivist

"...there are numerous and serious weaknesses in the arguments put forward to support the evidential value of those documents.

In consideration of the evidence that has been produced so far, we believe that an Abrahamic faith is indeed required to agree with the conclusions drawn by Pinotti and Lissoni about the contents of those documents."

[Editor's note:this is an automated translation from UFO – rivista di informazione ufologica no. 29, July 2004 using DeepL; editing by Stavros Hatzopoulos; revised by the author, Massimiliano Grandi–FW]

     The readers of UFO – Rivista di Informazione Ufologica are likely to have seen that in issue no. 27 (August 2003) Giuseppe Stilo has written the article “Fascists on Mars”, a detailed critical analysis of some aspects of the matter grown out of the so-called “fascist files,” the supposed documents dating back to the 1930s and propagated mainly by Roberto Pinotti and Alfredo Lissoni, both members of the National Ufological Center (CUN – Centro Ufologico Nazionale).

Stilo, rather than on the “documents” per se, had dwelt on the
Massimiliano Grandi
By Massimiliano Grandi
way the pages had been associated with matters such as the “flying saucers” allegedly designed or built by the Nazis, the legend of the “death ray,” and the like.

By this article, however, I would like to address the issues concerning the value of the very papers at the center of the controversy analyzing them from an archival and documental perspective: to that end in November 2003 the Italian Center for Ufological Studies, in the person of this writer, had a long discussion in Rome with Dr Paola Carucci – who in the past held the position of “Superintendent” of the Italian National Archives and was a professor of Archivistics at the Special School for Archivists and Librarians at “La Sapienza” University of Rome (in addition to being the author of numerous texts and articles in her domain of study) – on the events described in the now well-known book written by Pinotti and Lissoni

Even before the meeting with Dr Carucci, some features of the documents were already clear, as they have been sent by an unknown sender and are not easily accessible, since those in possession of the papers seem somewhat reluctant to make them available to ufology scholars who do not share their general views on the UFO phenomenon: all the above essentially nullifies their archival and historical value, since documents coming from an unknown source and, moreover, seemingly hidden from the free critical examination of the entire community of researchers and archivists lack the essential requirements of reliability and openness, indispensable if they are to be used as scientifically valid elements to support any thesis.

On top of that, some of the documentary material discussed would consist of mere reproductions of other documents: in fact, barring the first three dispatches, which Pinotti says he received respectively on Feb. 3, Feb. 19, and March 29, 1996, all the other documents – if one attentively and carefully sifts through articles sometimes unclear in explaining the sequence of the events – would be color photocopies. Now, producing and sending a photocopy by mail does not require any particular effort from a documental and archival point of view, both because it is only the original document the one that possesses a set of physical characteristics (paper type, ink type, signatures, etc.) that may be very difficult to falsify, and because a photocopy devoid of any kind of original mark of authenticity (signature, seal, stamp, etc.) affixed to it (especially when it comes from an unknown place and under mysterious circumstances) may theoretically be the result of a posteriori typesetting work mimicking the forms and content of an old document (the advent of the digital technology has greatly increased the risk that such forgeries can be produced, prompting archival communities around the world to devise appropriate countermeasures).

And indeed, in relation to this matter, in several cases Pinotti and Lissoni have published in the magazines featuring their articles only images of color photocopies, not images of originals.

Furthermore, from the behavior of the two authors you may glean that they do not consider the majority of the ufologists worthy being given even only the possibility to conduct a critical examination of the photocopies (whose value as pieces of evidence would be In any case – just to reiterate it – very limited).

An additional request – made recently by Stilo to Lissoni – to obtain a full copy of the expert report on the validity of the papers, has had no response.

What’s more, the photocopied documents are the most shocking ones: the documents from the first shipment, the alleged “originals,” contain reports of phenomena that today we would classify as “daytime discs,” “night lights,” or “encounters of the first kind,”, which would be interesting in any case, but certainly not so sensational as the discovery of “an alien airship” could be.

Now, no authority of the archival administration could consider minimally significant (and thus eventually take action to promote their recovery) documents that are photocopies of purported archival documents: archival assets – this is to be emphasized – are documents (even photocopies of other documents) that have become part of public archives (or of private archives declared to be of notable historical interest) in compliance with formal administrative procedures, not mere photocopies, which, moreover, have been obtained from unknown sources and under unclear circumstances.

The meeting between Centro Italiano Studi Ufologici (CISU) and Dr Carucci was very helpful to clarify some aspects of the whole matter. One of the points that have been discussed was the possible interest of the Italian state in the recovery of documents containing information of national security interest, since in this case the national interest would not originate from archival considerations – that is, from the original state-owned nature of the documents – but from the intrinsic importance of the information contained in the documents: in this case even simple photocopies could be considered worthy of consideration. In this respect, Dr Carucci pointed out that – aside from the fact it might be disputed that documents supposedly dating back to the Thirties of the 20th Century can still be of interest for national security – the archival administration can only be interested in claiming documents that were certainly produced by the public administration and which are acknowledged to be potentially of interest for historical research purposes. This means that only in the presence of elements giving clear evidential value (evidential value which, as we have just said, at least from the archival point of view is completely absent, since these are simple photocopies of unknown origin and mailed by an anonymous person) could the Archival Administration show some interest; if not, these documents would be regarded as just one of the numerous unverified rumors (rumors concerning a wide range of matters, almost always totally unrelated to Ufology) that have always been spread during the fascist regime in the period of the “Ventennio” and often feature aspects fit for being published in pulp magazines (“Ventennio” means “period of twenty years” and in Italian is used as a moniker to indicate the fascist period which lasted just twenty years).

Let us now consider the famous “originals” of the first shipment received by Pinotti, those arrived on Feb. 3, Feb. 19, and March 29, 1996.

Later on we shall briefly deal with the examination Pinotti had asked to conduct on the paper and ink of these originals. For the time being, we simply analyze the structure of the documents.

In each of them, there is no indication – we want to lay stress on that – no indication, that would qualify them as belonging to a public archives or as confidential records.

The structure of the letters – whatever the origin may be – in any case is that of pieces of private correspondence, because the recipients, of whom no trace can be found, are addressed in the same way as it is usually done in epistolary exchanges between private individuals.

There is a letterhead – that is true – but that means nothing, because it is not difficult to find or to reproduce letterhead paper. On discussing these arguments, Giuseppe Stilo has shown to me, for example, blank templates of letterheads dating back to administrations of the Italian Social Republic.

It is a common feature of private archives – as Dr Carucci has pointed out – to find private correspondence written on a letterhead: if someone is an official of the public administration and writes in private – i.e. for personal reasons – to a third party or even to another official, he or she may use a letterhead, but this per se is not enough to give the document a public nature.

In the scenario described above we would be dealing with writings that do not possess any formal structure qualifying them as documents belonging to an archives: that seems to be just the case of the documents presented by Pinotti, which have no protocol number, no stamps, no internal partition, and no indications, in relation to the sender and the recipient, that would evidence any kind of public function which has been supported through their creation and use. On these pieces of paper, anonymous remarks are made about phenomena that show a vague similarity to the modern UFO sightings: statements such as “The Air Force distributed a questionary to all pilots operating in the area. Deny any version. The fact is to be attributed exclusively to an optical phenomenon. Il Duce follows personally the incident” do not mean anything from any point of view and more in particular do not qualify these letters as public documents.

It should be stressed that this issue is not just one of formal regularity or legal definitions, but a question at the very heart of archival science: according to Paoli, the archival document is “a written record of a fact which has legal nature, drafted in compliance with specific standards, which are intended to procure trustworthiness and give it evidential value,” [1] and – even if this definition has been debated, further analyzed and broadened over time by archival scholars – in any case it is evident that a piece of paper reporting extraordinary news will never be considered an archival document just because the events reported would imply the involvement of statesmen and public administrations.

The discussion concerning the nature of these documents – that is merely private and by no means public – should also be extended, in Carucci’s opinion, to the wire of the Milan Telegraph Office, which is the only one, among the original pieces of paper, to show an elaborate graphical appearance, complete with pre-printed fields to contain specific kinds of information and with the heading on the left-hand side at the bottom “Mittente – Agenzia Stefani – Milano,” (In English “Sender – Stefani Agency – Milan”)” but on which, if one attentively analyzes the various parts of the document, one can see that the name of the addressee has been erased by a scrawl, as even Pinotti and Lissoni had pointed out. This means that the telegram could just be a communication sent to a private individual, and therefore that its status may be that of a document belonging to an archives of a public body is only a hypothesis.

The content of the wire is anything but specific: “Absolute secrecy on unqualified air-ship available at confidential report 23/47 stop letter follows.”

This could also be the sheer reporting of a normal airship whose activity might have had some military implications (assuming the wire has not been forged, of course) in the context of ordinary surveillance services.

Aside from the vague and sometimes trivial nature of the information reported in these documents, we point out the inherent contradictions in the claims made about the absolute secrecy of this information, which would nevertheless have circulated (according to Pinotti and Lissoni) on Senate documents; documents of the Chamber of Deputies; postcards from the Senate of the Kingdom; wires from the Telegraph Office of Milan. Quite a widespread circulation for information that should have been covered by total secrecy!

It should be added that Pinotti claims that the alleged RS/33 cabinet directly depended from the Duce (see UFO: la visita extraterrestre, No. 11, September 1999, p. 14-15), as it would have been only pro forma an agency connected with the Regia Accademia d’Italia (Royal Academy of Italy), while in fact it would have acted independently from any other institutional body (“except for the person of Benito Mussolini”).

Such an assertion, not in line according to Professor Carucci with the organization of the fascist regime – an authoritarian but complex government, organically structured in its articulations and in its relations with all the civil and military state institutions – should be supported by a thorough historical-institutional research that would prove with certainty its existence.

Moreover, such a level of confidentiality seems to be at odds with the documents of the first three dispatches (the “original” ones), which would show (if one considers them as documents really produced by the offices, mentioned in the respective letterheads, to fulfil their institutional activities) a circulation of them not in compliance with the requirements of the highest level of secrecy, since even wires from the Milan Telegraph Office would have been used.

The absence of secrecy appears then to be confirmed by the fact that documents related to sightings of mysterious aircrafts around the mid-1930s in the airspace of Italy – sightings mentioned by Lissoni in UFO Notiziario No. 12 of May 2000 (p. 41-44) – were easily found by the writer at the State Archives of Milan (Archivio di Stato di Milano) in the fonds of the Prefecture, Cabinet, Series I, category 14 (Aviation), folder 400 “reporting of suspicious airplanes.” 1931; 1933, 1934-1935 and folder 401 “landings of foreign aircraft,” 1928-1936 and “reports of suspicious airplanes.” 1936-1937 (despite the fact that Lissoni had not provided the necessary information for the location of the files with the documents: but it was extremely easy to figure out where these were located): where is this alleged secrecy, especially when we consider that in the case in point this group would have been operating in total concealment, so much so that they would have left no trace – a commonplace for ufologists – of themselves in the archives?

Then there is the envelope on which it would be possible to read “Confidential – in the hands of His Excellency Galeazzo Ciano,” which arrived at Pinotti on February 3, 1996 along with the “original” documents, and which would also be “original”: however, this envelope too does not possess any characteristics that would allow us to determine whether it belongs to a public or a private archive. The presence of the heading “Senate of the Reign” on the back of the envelope does not mean anything from this point of view – given the circumstance that a very large number of empty envelopes of that type, and dating back to that time, still exists in Italy -, just as the fact that there would be traces of broken seals on the envelope and the “sinusoidal stroke of a fountain pen” affixed “to guarantee the closure” (of the envelope), which would also appear twice more on the envelope, are of no importance at all: all these particulars have no relevance whatsoever in relation to the capacity of giving evidential value to the documents, as all of them can be reproduced very easily.

Finally, Dr Carucci – with reference to the statement made by Lissoni about the significance of the “movement of prefects,” reported in an article of the Corriere della Sera of June 15, 1933 (see UFO Notiziario, No. 10, March 2000, p. 43) and believed by Lissoni to be a possible indication of the excitement that followed the UFO landing – notes that the movements of prefects, like the one that took place in June 1933, were part of the routine of the Ministry of the Interior both in the liberal era and during the Fascist regime: this regular alternation was due to the fact that the government did not consider it advisable for the same prefect to remain in the same place for too long.

We finally come to the question of the technical expertise on the papers which Pinotti has boasted about. Firstly, it is necessary to remark that an expert opinion, in any case, cannot be used to affirm that the papers are “authentic”, as written too emphatically (by using at same time print, bold, italics and exclamation point) on page 23 of the CUN, UFO Notiziario No. 11, April 2000, or that they are part of an archives, but theoretically one can only establish whether they are “old” papers or not. Whether the degree of accuracy of calculating the age of the documents can go so far as to state that they are pre-World War II is difficult to say, but the outcome of an interview with the Maero-Cimini company, which also acts as the publishing office for the National College of Graphic Experts’ bulletin, has made the writer doubt that such a degree of accuracy is feasible.

And here we address another point: the National College of Graphic Experts has several branches in Italy, and the branch I contacted is the main one and is located in Turin [2]. Since Roberto Pinotti had the expertise carried out on documents that are claimed to be “original”, this College seemed a suitable body to have some more information on the topic.

The staff of the Maero-Cimini firm were extremely open to collaboration, within the limits of their expertise. They asked to be sent by fax a photocopy of the page on which notice was given of the results of the technical expertise commissioned by Pinotti, namely – as we have already said – of page 23 of UFO Notiziario No. 11 of April 2000.

What has been reported in this issue of UFO Notiziario, however, are only the conclusions of the technical report, and from that it is not clear which technologies the expert who carried out the analyses – Antonio Garavaglia, consultant for the Court of Como – used (reputedly in 1999). In the aforementioned conclusions the statements that have been made are actually – according to the graphic experts I consulted – rather generic.

To understand well the examinations that have been performed one would need to know in detail the procedures and tests that have been carried out, but that is where the openness of the information concerning the actions which have been conducted becomes relevant: according to the Maero-Cimini practice, since the examination was not carried out within a courtroom, all the related documentation is shown or not at the discretion of the person who had it performed. We know of the existence of a handout specifying in detail the examinations conducted by Antonio Garavaglia, and in spite of the silence after our former requests, we now ask again in this article that the documentation concerning the details of the examinations which have been carried out may be made available as soon as possible to the whole community of the UFO scholars: without a totally open and transparent circulation of information and without a level of trust in those who will review the work that has been done, any research cannot be called a historical or scientific work, but only an exercise for initiates!

In consideration that the expert Garavaglia was the guest speaker at one of the last congresses organized by the National Ufological Center in San Marino and then in Milan, and that in Spring 2000, during a press conference, the documents describing how the examinations were conducted were handed out to the members of the media who were present, we are confident that Roberto Pinotti may be willing to give a copy of the entire documentation on the experiments that have been performed, in order to have their appropriateness verified and to allow the possible preparation of another expert report.

We still hope that Pinotti may understand how the fact that it has been very difficult so far for researchers unwelcome to him to view the details of the expert report jeopardizes the presumption of honesty about his theories and may realize that a cross-examination, conducted by qualified professionals on behalf of other parties, would give a better understanding of the nature of those papers.

Does he not agree, then again, on that such actions would be beneficial for the UFO research?

It is theoretically possible to have tests performed to understand – for example – whether old ink and old paper were used to draft a new document or whether instead the document was actually created at a much earlier date (although there is not always a clear agreement among all the experts of this domain as to the highest degree of precision achievable by using techniques aimed at establishing the date of a document), but from what we have been able to see so far, it is not possible to understand – we lay stress on that – what procedures the expert Garavaglia has used to draw his conclusions.

To sum up:

1) The documents come from anonymous sources;

2) the documents are either “originals” without any formal element that may qualify them as belonging to the archives of a public body or they are photocopies of no archival value;

3) the documents, for the time being, do not seem to be available to those who – like us – want to have them examined by additional experts;

4) the “original” documents – which are far less sensational (indeed, sometimes they are really trivial) than the photocopies when we consider the contents of the news reported in them – would be very old according to a graphical expertise; however, only the final conclusions of the expertise are available and we do not know in detail the tests and examinations that have been conducted;

5) even if the documents would have been “secretive,” they seem to have been disseminated in many ways notwithstanding their alleged confidentiality;

6) by Lissoni’s own admission, no trace can be found in the archives to confirm the news reported in the documents, except for the files found in the State Archives of Milan: as we have said above, the contents of those documents have completely been misunderstood by Lissoni.

In conclusion, we would like to reiterate clearly that – despite the criticisms – the intent of those who want to delve into such a matter cannot be, to try to give evidence of the fact that those papers are a forgery. This would be illogical and no fabrication has been demonstrated for the time being. We have instead pointed out that there are numerous and serious weaknesses in the arguments put forward to support the evidential value of those documents.

In consideration of the evidence that has been produced so far, we believe that an Abrahamic faith is indeed required to agree with the conclusions drawn by Pinotti and Lissoni about the contents of those documents.

[1] Paoli, C., Diplomatica, new updated edition by G. C. Bascapè, Sansoni, Florence, 1942 (anastatic reprint 1969), p. 18.
[2] Web site It is also noteworthy the page, where some useful techniques – of course not all of the existing techniques – for recognizing the handwriting and establishing the authenticity of some specific features of a document are presented, and a detailed list of the College’s Italian branches is available.

Massimiliano Grandi is an archivist graduated at the Special School for Archivists and Librarians, “La Sapienza” University, Rome.

*Special thsnks to Edoardo Russo & CISU

Friday, August 18, 2023

More on Whistleblower Grusch and UFO Crashes

Whislteblower, David Grusch gving opening statement at the Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena: Implications on National Security, Public Safety, and Government Transparency congressional hearing

"... we have been bombarded by reports from David Grusch about what he heard from sources he refuses to identify, and that the US Government has, in its possession both craft and bodies from an alien source ... Yet the main street media is acting as if this is something new."

     On June 25, there was another video put up on YouTube about David Grush and his claims of captured or retrieved alien craft, and the bodies of the alien pilots. It is a long interview and you can watch it here. Here’s one of the things I found interesting. They made it clear that Grush had not been before a senate committee and he apparently had not talked to any of the senators. He did meet with senators’ staffs and answered their questions. It also seems that he met with, and was questioned by members of the House. I don’t know how long that session, or those sessions, lasted. I will not speculate about his being under oath or if those sessions were somewhat less formal.
Kevin Randle -
By Kevin Randle
A Different Perspective

I will also note that in the above commentary, there was discussion of the body language analyses that have been done. I did watch one and it seemed the conclusion was a more or less, “I don’t know.” There were no significant indications of lying, but there were hints that he might not have been comfortable with what he was saying. Well, if he’s spilling secrets, I can imagine that some of the questions might have made him nervous.

Here's the thing about this that I simply do not understand. He is not the first person with interesting credentials to make these claims. I too, have talked with military officers who have some knowledge of UFOs, crash retrievals, and the recovery of the alien flight crews.

Brigadier Arthur Exon told me about the material from the Roswell crash being taken to Wright Field, later Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. He said that he talked with those involved in the analysis of the material. He said, “We heard the material was coming to Wright Field.”
Brigadier General Arthur Exon

I asked about bodies and General Exon said, “There was another location… where they did say there were bodies… they were all found outside the craft but were in fairly good condition.”

And he said that one of the bodies had been taken to Lowry Army Air Field near Denver because the Army had a mortuary service there. They would know the best way to preserve what might be a unique biological sample. Exon said all this on audio tape.

I asked him, specifically and he told me, “Roswell was the recovery of a craft from space.” I have a letter from him in which he acknowledges that all the quotes in the book, UFO Crash at Roswell were accurate and this is one of those quotes.

The point is that here is an Air Force general acknowledging that the military had recovered a craft not built on Earth and piloted by beings who were not human. Yet this information was of no interest to the main stream media and our attempts to share that information with the Air Force during their investigation was not acknowledged.

Chester Lytle had a distinguished career. He was involved in creating the trigger for the first atomic bombs, helped develop hydrofoil technology and was a colleague of William Blanchard who was the commanding officer in Roswell in July 1947. Don Schmitt and I interviewed Lytle several times and he shared with us several UFO stories in which he was one of the primary witnesses. The most important thing he said, however, he told to Robert Hastings, who reported it in his book UFOs and Nukes.

According to Hastings, Lytle told him as he, Lytle, was making an emergency trip to Chicago on an Air Force transport, Blanchard, traveling with him, told him a little more about the strange craft that had been found in Roswell in 1947. Blanchard, who was the Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force in the 1960s, told Lytle that a spacecraft had crashed near his base and that there had been four bodies recovered.

Hastings wrote, “Startled by Lytle’s unexpected admission, I [Hastings] asked, ‘Blanchard actually told you that the Roswell object was an alien spacecraft?’ Lytle replied emphatically, ‘Oh, absolutely!’”

Patrick Saunders, who was the adjutant at the Roswell Army Air Field in 1947, bought copies of both UFO Crash at Roswell and The Truth about the UFO Crash at Roswell. He wrote on the flyleaf of one of those books, “Here’s the truth and I still haven’t told anybody anything!” He signed with “Pat.”

On that page, with a heading of “Damage Control, was a description of some of the activities at the RAAF. It said:

Files were altered. So were personal records, along with assignments and various codings and code words… After the impact site was cleaned, the soldiers were debriefed, and the bodies and the craft removed, silence fell. It would not be broken for almost forty-five years.
heading of “Damage Control, was a description of some of the activities at the RAAF
Patrick Saunders statement about the accuracy
of the information included in the book

And not to drag this out much longer, Edwin Easley, who was the Provost Marshal in Roswell, told me that he had been sworn to secrecy, that Mack Brazel (the man who reported the wreckage to the base) had been held in the base guest house for a number of days, confirming that end of the story, and mentioned “the creatures,” to family members just prior to his death in the 1990s.

The real point here is that in the last few weeks we have been bombarded by reports from David Grusch about what he heard from sources he refuses to identify, and that the US Government has, in its possession both craft and bodies from an alien source. But this is exactly what Don and I reported in the early 1990s complete with the names of sources and documentation confirming the credentials of those sources. Yet the main street media is acting as if this is something new.

I might add here, that I served as both an Army and an Air Force intelligence officer. I served in Iraq and was decorated with the Bronze Star Medal and the Combat Action Badge. In other words, I have some of the same credentials as does Grusch, and when Don and I published our books on Roswell, the response from the media was underwhelming.

My research, and Don’s research didn’t end there. I have since published Roswell in the 21st Century and Understanding Roswell, which I believe bring the whole of that case into sharper focus. And before someone mentions the nonsensical Mogul explanation for the debris recovered, I might suggest you consult both the books which demonstrate that Mogul is not a viable answer.

If you are starved for names, dates, sources and documentation, these books provide it and as my old nemesis used to say, “It only takes one case to prove that UFOs are extraterrestrial.” Roswell is that case and the evidence overlooked for decades is out there for those interested in reading about it.